Review of Population and Social Policy, No. 9, 2000, 87–117

Population Issues in the Netherlands
Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN*

Abstract
Population dynamics are intricately related to long-lasting processesof social, economic, and cultural change. This article gives the example of theNetherlands and shows that this European country strives to optimize the wellbeing of its population in terms of health, income, and labor participation. The
Dutch population is among the youngest in an ageing Europe and will continue togrow for the time being. Population density is high, making space a critical issue.
Many people would prefer a less populated country. Fertility is more or less stableat below-replacement levels without indications for major change. Women havetheir children at relatively advanced ages. The decline of the youngest population
has more or less run its course, while the main thrust of population ageing is yet
to come. No specific demographic targets have been set, or changed, in view ofthe emerging population decline, although a stationary population is viewed as
most desirable. Policies will remain accommodative rather than directive.
Lifelong education is promoted, female labor force participation has increased
substantially over the past few decades, popularizing the one-and-a-half-income
family (father working full-time, mother working part-time). However, concerns
over late parenthood are increasing. Due to labor force commitments and thelack of child care facilities many young adults postpone having their babies.
Family policies aim at making family and labor market careers more compatible.

1. Introduction
In the Dutch welfare state labor and space are by far the “hottest issues.” The
Netherlands is densely populated, space is scarce, and, as in probably all countries,
education, health, social security, and environmental policies aim at making the lifeof the citizenry as long and as pleasant as possible. To a large extent people may
decide what is best for themselves. As soon as a person falls beneath the level ofreasonable subsistence, he or she can ask for support. The current welfare state
guarantees basic (minimum) incomes for everyone, and the number of people inpoverty is relatively small. The country is fast becoming a melting pot of people withvarious socioeconomic and sociocultural backgrounds who live side by side. To alarge extent deviant behavior is tolerated as long as it does not harm other people.
This is a revised version of a lecture and paper presented on November 24, 1998 at a seminar at
the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research in Tokyo, and on November 26,
1998 at a seminar at the National Advisory Council on Population Problems, Ministry of Healthand Welfare in Tokyo.
* Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI), The Hague.

[ 87 ]

88

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

25
High

Millions of people

20

Medium
15

Low

10
5
0
1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 1 Population of the Netherlands, 1840–2050, including forecasts for 1996–2050

An official population or family policy does not exist; thus no demographic
targets are set. Government policies are humane, accommodating, and laissezfaire in nature—not directive. Increasingly, the Dutch political system is directedby European Union (EU) policies. Population dynamics are, of course, intricately
related to long-standing processes of social, economic, and cultural change.
Like many other countries in Western Europe, the Netherlands has collected
population data since the beginning of the nineteenth century. These figures
show that around 1800 the area that is now called the Netherlands was inhabitedby about 2.1 million people, as opposed to nearly 15.7 million by 1998 (Figure1). After Germany (with 82 million inhabitants), France (59 million), Italy (57million), Spain (40 million), and the United Kingdom (58 million), theNetherlands currently is the sixth most populated country in the European Union.
Around 1840 (with 2.9 million inhabitants) the Netherlands acquired the
topographical shape that it maintains today, although its inhabitable area
increased substantially due to land reclamation: turning water areas into polders(land under sea level). Within a total (land + water) area of 41,000 km2 theoverall inhabitable land increased from 32,600 km2 (= 80% of the total) to
currently 33,900 km2 (= 83%). About 27% of the total inhabitable land area isbelow sea level. Dunes, dams, and dikes protect the country against sea andriver water, while electric pumping equipment continuously keeps thegroundwater below sea level.
Japan, with about 380,000 km2, is nine times larger than the Netherlands.
However, with an average of 380 persons per km2 (460 per km2 inhabitable land),the Netherlands is more crowded than Japan (with an average of 330 persons perkm2) and is among the top ten most densely populated countries in the world.
National population density figures are only rough indicators: local population

Population Issues in the Netherlands

89

density figures vary between 6,500 persons per km2 in the The Hague area and25 per km2 in the least populated areas. Amsterdam has about 4,000 persons per
km2. The regional variation in population density in Japan ranges from 19,700
persons per km2 in Nakano-ku to 34 per km2 in Hinohara-mura. Tokyo-to has
5,400 persons per km2, slightly less than The Hague.
The demography of a country at any given moment reflects a history of
population dynamics that spans decades. This essay gives an overview of themain population trends in the Netherlands over the past century (section 2) andthe expected trends (forecasts) for the next 50 years (section 3). Population andfamily issues are then considered from the standpoint of policy (section 4).

2. Population Dynamics in the Twentieth Century
2.1. Population Size

When the twentieth century began, the Netherlands had a population of 5.1
million. By 1949 there were 10.0 million inhabitants, and by 1990, 15.0 million.
Figure 2 shows that the rate of growth (per 1,000 residents) fluctuated: thepopulation accelerated from about 1860 to 1920 and immediately after World War
II, but since the 1960s it has diminished rapidly. Today migration rises and falls

Rate of growth per 1,000 residents (%)

1.03

1.02

1.01
High
Medium
1
Low

0.99
1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 2 Annual increase in the population of the Netherlands, 1840–2050,
including forecasts for 1996–2050

90

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

more dramatically than natural increase. Absolute natural increase (Figure 3) rosealmost constantly until after the postwar baby boom, although it dropped during
the economic crisis of the 1930s.
At the moment that natural increase started to drop significantly (late 1960s),
the country moved from a more or less zero migration—but during the 1950s
with a significant emigration surplus—to an immigration surplus. Currently
natural increase is only slightly higher than the immigration surplus. It is being
debated whether the Netherlands should officially be labeled as an “immigration
country”: despite this surplus, the government has no specific immigration policy.
2.2. Fertility and Family

Probably the most noteworthy demographic phenomenon in the Netherlands
since 1840 is the postwar baby boom. Compared to neighboring countries, theNetherlands had a high and long-lasting boom (Figure 4). Although the fertility
rate had already dropped before World War II, the turmoil during the conflictprobably led to a revival of traditional family values. Many of these baby
boomers are relatively young and fertile. As a result the Netherlands still has acomparatively young population. Although family size is small, the high absolute
number of women in the reproductive age range ensures a large number ofbabies. This will change rapidly in the decades to come.
The total period fertility rate (TPFR) declined from about 4.6 in 1900 to the250
Naturalincrease

Thousands of people

200
150
100

High

50
Medium0
Low–50
Net migration
–100
–150
1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 3 Natural population increase and net migration in the Netherlands,
1840–2050, including forecasts for 1996–2050

Population Issues in the Netherlands

91300
Live births

250

High

Thousands of people

High

High

MediumLow

200
Medium

150

Low
100
Deaths

50
1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 4 Number of live births and deaths in the Netherlands, 1840–2050,
including forecasts for 1996–2050

current level of about 1.6. This decrease indicates the almost complete
disappearance of unwanted pregnancies. Yet the total cohort fertility rate (TCFR)
has not dropped below 1.8 (cohorts with completed fertility = female birth cohorts
of 1955 and earlier). Figure 5 shows both the period and cohort total fertility rates(TFRs) (with an interval of 28 years, signifying that women born in the year x willon average have their children in the year x + 28). Also given is the total
replacement fertility rate (TRFR), indicating the number of children needed per
woman to replace the parental generation under the given child mortality regimes.
After World War II the TCFR dropped almost continuously. This rate denotes thenumber of children at the end of a woman’s reproductive life and is independentof the timing of fertility. It tells us that especially large families have disappeared:
currently more than half of the couples who reproduce have only two children.
The TPFR shows the impressive postwar baby boom and its aftermath. For
more than two decades it has been below the replacement level. The Dutch
TPFR, however, is not the lowest in Europe. But contrary to the TCFR, thisindicator is dependent on the age at fertility. A more or less general rule is, if
women have children earlier in life than women from previous birth cohorts,then the TPFR will be higher than the TCFR; if they have children later thanprevious cohorts, the TPFR will be lower. From 1960 to 1970 women tended tohave children increasingly earlier, and from 1970 to 1996, increasingly later. This

92

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

is shown in Table 1, which gives the age-specific fertility rates from 1960 to 1996.
Currently the Netherlands stands as the “world champion of late motherhood”:
from 1970 to 1997 the average age of Dutch women at first birth increased from
24.0 years to 29.0 years. However, most Western countries show a rise in the age
at first birth as well, and quite a few of these countries follow closely on theheels of the Netherlands.
In research surveys Dutch women have given the following reasons (in order5

Number of children per woman

4.5
TPFR
4
3.5
3
2.5
TRFR
2

High
TCFR

Medium

1.5
Low
1
1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year
Source: Van Poppel and Ekamper (1999).
Key:TPFR = Total period fertility rate, 1900–2050
TCFR = Total cohort fertility rate: period, 1928–2023; cohorts, 1900–1995
TRFR = Total (cohort) replacement fertility rate (number of children needed per woman toreplace the parental generation): period, 1928–2023; cohorts, 1900–1995

Figure 5 Total fertility rates of the Netherlands, 1900–2050, including forecasts
for 1996–2050

Table 1 Age-specific fertility rates in the Netherlands, 1960–1996

1960
1970
1980
1990
1996

15–19

20–24

25–29

Age
30–34

35–39

40–44

45–49

12.0
17.1
6.8
5.9
4.2

105.9
122.9
70.5
42.1
33.4

209.8
186.9
143.4
120.1
99.1

160.3
115.3
75.5
113.9
118.1

94.5
53.9
19.5
35.9
44.8

38.3
16.7
4.2
4.9
6.3

4.0
1.6
0.4
0.4
0.3

Key: TPFR = Total period fertility rate

TPFR
3.12
2.58
1.60
1.62
1.53

Population Issues in the Netherlands

93of those most frequently mentioned) for delaying first births: at the momentchildren would not be compatible with my professional career, I do not want
children yet, children would be incompatible with my educational commitment, I
do not have a partner with whom I would like to share parenthood, I havefinancial concerns, I have doubts about having children, I do not yet agree withmy partner, I’m having a problem getting pregnant, and there are not enoughchild-care facilities nearby. A few of these reasons may mean the same thing:e.g., “at the moment children would not be compatible with my professional
career” and “I do not want children yet.”
The low and late fertility rates result in part from the fact that the Netherlands
has among the lowest teenage pregnancy and abortion rates in the world. It has
been called “one of the most perfectly contraceptive nations” ( Jones et al. 1986).
Teenagers and young adults have sufficient knowledge of and easy access tofamily planning and initially prepare for other life course options: theincreasingly higher levels of education (for women as well as men) andopportunities in the labor market are the main reasons why young adults delay
getting married and having children. After finishing their education and finding ajob, they are economically independent; they feel free and want to be able to do
and go where they want for a while. However, at almost the same age thatyoung adults previously married, most of them now start to cohabit. So the age
at first union has increased very little. But cohabitation is not as stable as
marriage: many couples split up after a while. It is increasingly the second or
third partner with whom people unite in a first marriage. Ultimately the majorityof Dutch adults marry, mainly because marriage is preferred when having
children. Thus, marriage is contracted when children are wanted or the woman isalready pregnant. As a consequence, nonmarital fertility rates are low comparedto those of many neighboring countries, although they are increasing.
Information on birth control methods is widely available in secondary education.
Since most young adults use them effectively, the Netherlands ranks high in its
share of women who are still childless in their late twenties or early thirties.
Currently well-educated women on the average begin having children at age 34,
but also moderately and less-educated women have started to delay childbearing(Figure 6). Because the educational level is still increasing, the age at childbearing
will likely continue to rise rather than level off or drop in the coming years.
The increasing challenges of globalization, urbanization, and secularization changefamily norms and values. Individualization is on the rise as well. Splitting up after arelationship is becoming more and more accepted as normal practice. After a while
one may have a new partner (sequential relationships). The rise in childlessness also
results from the increased frequency of women living without a partner just at thetime when they would like to become a mother. Next to that ranks not only the

94

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

Percentage of women still childless at age 28

100

80

60

40

20

0

Low

MediumHigh

Educational level
1945–49 birth cohorts

1950–54 birth cohorts

1955–59 birth cohorts

1960–64 birth cohorts

Source: Statistics Netherlands (1994).

Figure 6 Percentage of Dutch women still childless at age 28, by level of education
growing incidence of voluntary childlessness but also the incidence of involuntarychildlessness, as some women postpone childbearing so long that they end up nothaving any children at all due to problems of subfecundity or infecundity. The levelsof assisted reproductive technology in the Netherlands rank among the world’s
highest but cannot help every couple that seeks help.
Increasing educational levels are prompting the call for combining family
responsibilities and a career. Female participation in the labor market has
increased significantly in the Netherlands, but it still ranks low compared to thatin other European countries. Until the 1960s women were even dismissed fromtheir jobs as soon as they married, and most people did not believe that mothers
should have paid employment. The traditional one-income family (with thefather working full-time and the mother caring for the household and children)
was the norm. Today, the Dutch solution is part-time work; it is normal for twoparent families with one or two children to have one and a half incomes (usually
the father works full-time and the mother part-time). Economically active mothers
have become an almost completely accepted phenomenon, but many of themcomplain about time and “energy” problems when combining family andworkplace commitments. The shortage of child-care facilities is especiallytroublesome: mothers still feel more or less pushed to quit their jobs and stay atPopulation Issues in the Netherlands

95

home to care for their own children over earning an income. Although family
and career are becoming more compatible, the combination seems to be easiest
for mothers having a part-time job and not more than one child. Quite a few
women quit their jobs, most of them only temporarily, after the birth of theirsecond child. It will still take some time for the social security system, which isbased on one income per family, to adapt to the currently more preferredsupplementary or egalitarian household that permits dual incomes. As rising
educational levels lead to higher female employment rates, however, it is likelythat the low, under-replacement fertility rates will continue in the future.
All these issues are part of what has been labeled the “Second Demographic
Transition” (Van de Kaa 1987, 1994): i.e., an increasing pluralization of Western
society, where from about 1965 the traditional family gradually lost popularity.
Rising educational levels and increased participation in the labor force (especiallyamong women), female emancipation, cohabitation, postponement of marriage andchildbearing, increasing voluntary childlessness and nonmarital fertility, and smallerfamilies all reflect a change in the family pattern—from a value system emphasizing
survival and economic security to one stressing self-expression and autonomy.
Egalitarian roles among partners are becoming more important, and family forms
show greater diversification. We now observe more families in which the parents
are living together unmarried; they are not viewed nor do they see themselves asdeviant. Moreover, there is an increase in the number of unions without
permanent co-residence, the so-called LAT (Living Apart Together) relationship. A
mother may choose not to marry if she prefers not to live with the father of herchild. Various family forms exist side by side as a result of deliberately making
different choices. Union formation and childbearing are negotiated. Increasingly
couples may opt for a legal marriage only if they want to have children.
From fertility surveys we know that most young adults prefer a family withchildren but many are uncertain of the optimal timing for childbearing andtherefore postpone having the first child. Partners engage in much deliberation of
how many children to have and when to have them. Many women envision alarger family than they actually have. This means that projected family size is
reduced during the process of family building (De Beer and Van de Giessen 1989).
Perhaps every time a new baby is born initial ideas are reconsidered (Monnier1987). Or is the number people initially have in mind only a vague concept?
It turns out that there is a systematic bias between intentions and behavior. In
general, to realize plans is much more difficult than people expect: it takes much
longer to find a suitable partner and to agree with him or her, and over time newcommitments may interfere. As a result, the “loss of fertility” can be attributed todelaying so long that problems of subfecundity or infecundity prevent the start orcontinuation of a pregnancy leading to a vital baby, to separation or divorce

96

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

before the ultimate family size is reached, or to a more rational reconsiderationof earlier views. Only in a few cases does a family end up larger than planned—e.g., because of multiple births.
These findings may gain policy interests: if the welfare state makes work andfamily more compatible, family building can benefit (see section 4). In the 1980s,
however, the economic situation made it difficult for young people just entering
the labor market to find a job. The insecurity of employment also contributed topostponement of childbearing.
2.3. Mortality

From an international perspective the Netherlands is characterized not only by low
and late fertility but also by low and late mortality. The general state of health of the
population has improved dramatically over the past century, when life expectancy
at birth almost doubled (Figure 7). Also at other ages the increase in life expectancy
was impressive (Table 2). Infant mortality rates are at a biological minimum.
Childbearing no longer occurs with great frequency because so few infants die.
If there is a societal field where policy measures with an (unspecified)demographic target are active, then that field is health and mortality. Physicians
are trained to prevent early death: life should last as long as possible. As in othercountries, major advances in the Netherlands have resulted from continuous

85

Medium

80

Women

High

Low
High

Low

75
Medium

Men

Age

70
65
60
55
50
45
1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year
Source: Van Poppel and Ekamper (1999).

Figure 7 Life expectancy at birth in the Netherlands, 1900–2050, including
forecasts for 1996–2050

Population Issues in the Netherlands

97

Table 2 Life expectancy in the Netherlands at selected ages
Age
0
10
40
60
80
Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women
1840–1851
1900–1909
1951–1955
1991–1995

36.1
51.0
70.9
74.3

38.5
53.4
73.5
80.2

44.4
54.3
63.4
65.0

46.1
55.4
65.6
70.7

24.1
29.5
34.8
36.0

25.8
30.8
36.6
41.4

12.1
14.7
17.7
18.3

12.9
15.5
18.8
23.1

4.0
4.9
5.8
6.4

4.1
5.2
6.1
8.3

government support of programs to reduce avoidable health problems andpremature mortality (prevention, healthy food processing). This has included
strengthening measures to maintain and improve the quality of life of chronicallyill people, to assist those who cannot work because of illness, and to reduce
disparities among those who do not benefit to the same extent from
improvements in the general state of health (immigrants, the homeless, andcitizens in the lower socioeconomic strata).
The overall objective of the Dutch health care system is to ensure that each
citizen has access to quality care. The promotion of efficiency and cost control andthe fostering of solidarity and mutual responsibility among all those involved areemphasized in the ongoing modernization of this system. Medical developments
have also had positive effects on the major causes of death such as cardiovasculardiseases, cancer, and injuries resulting from accidents. Moreover, people in theterminal phase of incurable illnesses may opt for euthanasia to end their suffering.
2.4. Migration

Immigration to and emigration from the Netherlands were inconsequential in theearlier decades of the twentieth century but increased substantially in the second
half (Figure 8). A significant number of Dutch citizens have always traveled
abroad, as traders, as employees of commercial travel or transport companies, oras temporary or more permanent settlers in the former Dutch colonies (nowIndonesia, Suriname, and the Netherlands Antilles).
A substantial number of immigrants have roots in present-day Indonesia (over400,000); other large non-EU subpopulations are from Turkey (271,000), Suriname(254,000), and Morocco (225,000). Depending on how these groups are defined,
people of foreign descent comprise about 7% to 8% of the current population of
the Netherlands. In addition to migration for the purpose of family reunion or
family formation, the currently unstable economic and political situation in large
parts of the world especially gives rise to substantive flows of refugees andasylum seekers. Migration to and from other member states of the European

98

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

160
High

140
Thousands of people

Medium120

Immigration
Low/High

100

MediumLow

80
60
Emigration
40
20
0
1840

1860

1900

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 8 Annual number of immigrants and emigrants in the Netherlands,
1840–2050, including forecasts for 1996–2050
Union is of course “free,” since EU citizens may move without restraint. Like manyother EU members, the Netherlands realizes that international migration willcontinue to play an important role in its population dynamics.
2.5. Age Structure: Ageing

Although fertility is currently low and late, the legacy of a relatively young
population and continued population growth results mainly from the large andrelatively long-lasting postwar baby boom (1946–69). These birth cohorts haveleft “heavy marks” on Dutch society since World War II and will continue to do
so in the coming decades.
As in most countries at the beginning of the twentieth century, the age
pyramid in the Netherlands was a real pyramid. The effect of the epidemiologicaland demographic transition to lower birth and death rates (lower TFRs andhigher life expectancies) was not only population growth but also population
ageing. Until the 1960s the percentage of the population aged 65 and overincreased almost continuously but at a slow rate. From the 1970s the curve wasmuch steeper, mainly due to the drop in fertility. But even today the Dutch curvelags behind that of most other European countries, primarily because of the“impressive” high and long postwar baby boom. The decline of the youngest
population has almost run its course, whereas the main thrust of population
ageing is yet to come: as soon as baby boomers reach age 65, the ageing process
will gain momentum (Figures 9 and 10).

Population Issues in the Netherlands

99

14
1850
12

10
1950

2000

%

8

6

2050

4

2
1900
0
0–4

5–9 10–14 15–19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85+

Age group

Figure 9 Population of the Netherlands by age group, 1850, 1900, 1950, 2000,
and 2050, including forecasts for 2000 and 2050 (medium variant only)
70
L
60
20–64

M
H

50

%

40
0–19
30
H

M

20

L
M

65+

10

80+
0

1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 10 Percentage of the Dutch population aged 0–19, 20–64, 65+, and80+, 1840–2050, including forecasts for 1996–2050

H
L

100

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

The dependency ratio is currently lower than in the past few decades, again
due to the drop in fertility. This means that the number of young people (0–19
years) significantly declined compared to that of the “active” (employed) age
groups (20–64 years). In contrast, the dependency of the elderly (those aged 65
and over), compared to that of those aged 20–64, gradually increased. Yet not all
persons in the “active” age groups were truly active in the labor market due tounemployment, disablement, or early retirement (Figure 11).
Much research is in progress on numerous aspects of an ageing society. Due tochanged demographic behavior (nuptiality and childbearing) but also to different life
experiences in the socioeconomic realms (participating in the labor market andgenerating an income), the postwar baby boomers have “better” perspectives thanthose aged 65 and over. Family networks, costs and benefits, social security,intergenerational transfers, living arrangements, leisure time activities after retirement,
employment trends of older workers, health care—all of these issues are topics ofresearch (many via surveys), but it remains difficult to understand every mechanism inan all-embracing model. The result is much speculation and various extrapolations.
The Netherlands realizes that the postwar baby boom gives an extra “demographic
bonus” right at this moment.1 Also, the relative prosperity of the Dutch economy in
the 1990s enabled a large share of the population to participate in the workforce,
which created additional income for investments now and savings tomorrow.
1.2

Thousands of people

1.0
Total

0–19/
20–64

0.8

H
M
L

0.6
H

0.4

M

L
M
H

L

65+/
20–64

0.2

80+/
20–64

0
1840

1860

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2020

2040

Year

Figure 11 Dependency ratio of the Dutch population aged 0–19, 65+, and 80+, perperson aged 20–64 years, 1840–2050, including forecasts for 1996–2050

1

For literature on the “demographic bonus,” see UNFPA (1998).

Population Issues in the Netherlands

101

3. Population Dynamics in the Next Century
3.1. Population Forecasts

Demographers have special expertise in looking forward. Forecasting the life
course of cohorts who have already been born is easier than forecasting the sizeand life course of cohorts who are still to come. But compared to other types offorecasting—e.g., economic—population forecasting seems to be relatively easy
and, more important, has a better chance of being accurate.
The official national population forecast of 1996 (Statistics Netherlands has
periodically prepared such forecasts since 1900) is of the cohort-survival type andconsists of three variants (low, medium, and high) to express uncertainty about future
demographic trends. For all variants, demographic behavior is modeled according toage-specific fertility rates for successive female birth cohorts (parameters: TCFR,
mean age at first birth, and percentage of childless women at age 50), to sex andage mortality rates (parameters: male and female life expectancy at birth and sexand age-specific mortality rates), and to absolute numbers of immigrants andemigrants with a specific age-sex structure. All fertility and migration parameters forthe coming decades start changing from current levels but level off and end
constant. Table 3 shows the basic input indicators, which result from discussions
with experts. For every new forecast Statistics Netherlands consults several experts.
Table 3 Main indicators in the 1996 population forecast for the Netherlands
Fertility: Female birth cohort, 1995
TCFR
Mean age at first birth
Percentage of childless women at age 50
Mortality, year 2050
Life expectancy at birth, men
Life expectancy at birth, women
Migration, year 2050
Immigration (×1,000)
Emigration (×1,000)
Net migration (×1,000)

Low

Medium

High

1.4
30.0
35

1.7
30.0
25

2.0
30.0
15

78.0
81.0

80.0
83.0

82.0
85.0

100
100
0

123
88
35

146
76
70

Key: TCFR = Total cohort fertility rate

3.2. Population Size

Although different from that of many other European countries, the population of
the Netherlands will probably continue to grow for about two more decades. For

102

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

the medium variant, it is expected to start decreasing from the year 2033 onward,
at 17.2 million (Figure 1 above). The uncertainty about the number of inhabitantsby the year 2050 is sizable: the gap between the variants of 12.7 and 21.4 million
amounts to nearly 9 million people. Moreover, it will make an extreme difference
whether the population continues to increase or whether it levels off at a certain
moment and then starts to decline.
3.3. Fertility

The fact that population size in the Netherlands follows a rather exceptional
European path can be attributed to the still relatively young age structure: i.e.,many women are of childbearing age. Although on average each of them has
only a few children, they together give birth to many more babies than thenumber of people who die. However, as soon as the birth cohorts of the 1960s
have finished reproducing, the number of newborns will likely drop. Obviously,
fluctuations in live births and deaths will affect the future age-sex structure.
Given the fertility indicators in Table 3, the number of live births will vary, as
shown in Figure 4 above. For the low and medium variants the numbers tend to
decrease, whereas for the high variant an increase is visible. The difference infamily size between the high and low variant of 0.6 children (2.0 vs. 1.4) turns
out to yield an enormous absolute difference by the year 2050 (over 250,000 vs.
about 100,000). Such differences also result from the variation in the number ofwomen of childbearing age available in a population. Since the postwar baby
boom was so large and responsible for a follow-up boom in the early 1990s, thefuture curve will probably continue to show booms and busts.
One criticism of the fertility indicators used in the most recent population
forecast could be the absence of a variation in the age of women on the birth oftheir first child. As previously indicated, the current age at first birth in the
Netherlands is probably the highest in the world, and a further rise is expected.
The assumed leveling off at 30 years may be too low. Given the increasing
concerns about late parenthood, the minister of social affairs in the Netherlands
recently requested the Netherlands Interuniversity (now Interdisciplinary)
Demographic Institute (NIDI) to prepare an inventory of available documentationon the determinants and consequences of late fertility (Beets 1997). NIDI’s reportshows that, compared to the countless publications on the number of children
born in the most obvious age range of mothers, there is scant literature on
starting a family at ages 28 to 30 or over (for determinants, see section 2.3);
indeed, only the forecasted distribution of the number of children by educational
level is given (Table 4). The rising medium and higher educational levels led to asmall increase in family size for those who opted for parenthood. But sincePopulation Issues in the Netherlands

103

Table 4 Assumed distribution of Dutch women by number of children,
average family size, and educational level, 1996
Level ofeducation

Age
group

0

Number of children
1
2
3

4+

Average expected
number of children

Low

30–34
25–29
30–34
25–29
30–34
25–29
30–34
25–29

11
12
15
19
31
32
17
20

13
14
14
11
16
9
14
12

8
8
7
7
5
6
7
7

2.00
2.00
1.89
1.86
1.45
1.55
1.84
1.81

Medium
High
Total

51
51
46
45
35
38
45
45

17
17
19
19
13
16
17
17

Source: De Jong (1997).

childlessness is so much higher among people with a higher education, theoverall number of children will be more or less stable.
3.4. Mortality

The assumptions for future life expectancy at birth are the only ones that do notlevel off (Figure 7 above). The basic idea is that those societal factors that
improve health conditions (medical and hygienic developments, dissemination of
information on and prevention of unhealthy risks) will prevail over factors that
may shorten life (unhealthy lifestyles, environmental risks). Another important
assumption is the slight decrease in the gap between male and female life
expectancy that is foreseen for all three variants. Starting in the 1960s, the gap
increased from an original level of about two years in favor of women, reachinga maximum of just over six and a half years in the 1980s, and decreasing
afterward—probably due to the fact that, with women’s rising participation in thelabor market, female life is becoming increasingly similar to male life.
The outcomes show ongoing increases in the absolute number of people
dying (Figure 4 above). The difference between the variants is insubstantial.
Since the highest life expectancy is combined with the highest fertility rate for thehigh variant, it is obvious that this variant contains the largest number of people:
initially the number of deaths is lower for the high variant, but around the year2039 the numbers become equal and cross. In the low variant the postwar baby
boomers are already “gone” by then.
The graph also shows that the number of deaths will cross the number of live
births in medium and low variant at certain moments in the foreseeable future:i.e., the moment when natural increase becomes negative in the Netherlands, a104

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

situation that already exists in several neighboring countries. Only net immigration
may then postpone the actual time when that population will start to shrink.
3.5. Migration

International migration flows are difficult to foresee. The current projections, whichtake into account a positive net international migration, seem realistic in light of therelative attractiveness of the Dutch economy.2 The forecast assumptions consist ofabsolute numbers of immigrants and emigrants (Figure 8 above). Although natural
increase changes to natural decrease in the medium variant in 2015, the assumed
net immigration of 35,000 persons per year postpones the moment of population
decline to 2034, the year that natural decrease rises above 35,000.
3.6. Age Structure: Ageing

The assumed below-replacement TFRs and the increasing life expectancy add tothe ongoing ageing process, which is irreversible for all three variants. The
percentage of the population aged 0–19 will drop by 2040 in all three variantsfrom the current level of about 24 to 17 (low), 21 (medium), and 23 (high); thelatter figure will then rise to 24. (See Figure 10 above.)
The proportion of people aged 65 or over will almost double in all variants.
The current level is nearly 14%. In the low variant, a rise is expected to 27% by
2040 with a slight decrease afterward. In the medium and high variants, thesepercentages will be somewhat lower. This means that after 2040, when the
postwar baby boom has died out, the ageing process will start to diminish. If thecalculations had been continued to an even later time, the most likely forecast
would be that the share of people aged 65 or over would level off somewherearound 20% to 23%, making it likely that the share of the elderly (65+ years)
would be larger than that of the youngest age group (0–19 years). The age groupin between—those aged 20–64—would follow a somewhat different path.
Currently the level is 62%. The future shows primarily lower levels but withfluctuations. Taken together, the gaps between the variants are substantial for thegroups aged 0–19 and 65+ but fairly small for that aged 20–64.
With an increasing life expectancy, many people at the retirement age of 65
still have numerous healthy years ahead. Nowadays an increasing percentage ofour population reaches the age of 80. Whereas that group’s share of the
population used to be insignificant (about 0.6% around 1900), today it stands at

2

Asylum seekers are counted as migrants only after admission procedures have been completed
or after a stay in the Netherlands of at least one year.

Population Issues in the Netherlands

105

3% and is expected to increase to 8% around 2050.
The demographic burden (dependency ratio) will fluctuate as well (Figure 11
above). Currently the total dependency is relatively low, but it will increase
mostly due to the rise in the elderly population. However, it is not anticipatedthat there will be more than 0.9 dependents per 1.0 independent. Higher levels
than expected by 2040 existed in the Netherlands around 1900, but at that timedependents were children almost by definition.
The two final issues in this category include the so-called family caregiver
potential and the effect of a woman’s age at first birth on ageing. The family
caregiver potential tries to illustrate the balance between the maximum number of
elderly people who may request help and the number of people who normallyprovide elderly care—i.e., the number of women aged 45–69 per persons aged 70
or over, particularly per nonmarried persons aged 70 or over.3 Figure 12 showsthat both rough indicators point in the same direction: the potential number of5

Number of women

4

3

2

1

0
1920

1930

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

Year
Women per person

Women per nonmarried person

Figure 12 Family caregiver potential in the Netherlands (number of women aged
45–69 per person aged 70+), 1920–2020, including forecasts for
1996–2020 (medium variant only)

3

The Netherlands population forecasts produce data not only by age-sex distribution but also by
marital status up to the year 2020.

106

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

caregivers will increase slightly at first but will diminish after 2010. There are
generally about 1.5 women aged 45–69 for every person aged 70 or over andabout 2.5 to 3 women for every nonmarried elderly person. The last indicator
assumes that many of the married elderly will help their partners if they are frail.
The timing of fertility has an impact on age structure; moreover, the lower thefertility rate, the greater is the effect of the timing of fertility on the annual
number of births. Beets (1997) modeled some of these effects by assuming
several fertility trends. Table 5 depicts the results for 1995 and 2025 of the special
forecasts NIDI made for the Dutch minister of social affairs, who was interested
in the number of young adults entering the labor market in the near future in
relation to the cost of the social security system. For the medium variant in the1996 national population forecast published by Statistics Netherlands (SN), Model
A assumes further postponement: the TFR is the same as in SN but the age at firstbirth rises to 32.5 years instead of leveling off at 30. Model B assumes a 10%
lower TFR than in SN. Model C assumes a combination: a 10% lower TFR and arise in the age at first birth to 32.5 years. In every model all other variables(fertility, mortality, and migration) are exactly the same as in SN.
It is clear from Table 5 that a further 2.5-year delay (Model A) would have adefinitive effect—almost equal to a 10% lower TFR (Model B)—on population
size and on age distribution (additional ageing). This means that an even further
delay would have a larger impact than a 10% lower TFR. Obviously a
combination of the two (Model C) would have greater effects.

Table 5 Ageing results of variations in the timing of fertility in the Netherlands
1995

2025
(SN)

Population size (millions)15.42 17.08
Number of live-born children (thousands) 191
181
Number of deaths (thousands)
136
186
Percentage of total population in selected age groups
0–9
12.5
11.0
10–19
11.8
11.1
20–29
15.9
12.9
65+
13.2
19.8
Key: SN = Statistics Netherlands

Model
A
B
(later) (lower)C(later + lower)

16.77
172
186

16.76
168
186

16.52
155
186

10.3
10.7
12.8
20.1

10.2
10.7
12.8
20.1

9.6
10.4
12.8
20.4

Population Issues in the Netherlands

107

4. Population Policies
4.1. Royal Commission on Population Issues

Unlike the fear of depopulation that already existed before World War II in some
European countries (England and Wales, France, Germany, Sweden) and was
dealt with by official Commissions on Population Issues and/or Family andWelfare Associations (Gauthier 1996), until the war no such fear existed in the(generally religious) Netherlands, probably because of the high population
density. However, the postwar baby boom did raise concern about thecontinuing high fertility rates and the concomitant population increase.
Emigration was stimulated in the 1950s, when about 620,000 citizens left thecountry; many of them started a new life in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, or
the United States. Yet in the same period 490,000 immigrants arrived, among
them numerous Dutch nationals from the Dutch East Indies after Indonesia’s
declaration of independence.
Discussions on deliberately reducing the size of families had already begun
before World War II and certainly during the 1950s but mainly withinnonreligious, higher-educated circles. Politically, family planning was taboo until
the 1960s, although the issue of high population density was raised on several
occasions. The legal introduction of the birth control pill took place only after
brief but vigorous debate in Parliament in the early 1960s. The pill was easily
accepted by the population and “pill consumption” increased dramatically.
Nevertheless, it took a while for the birthrate to drop (the postwar baby boomers
were reaching a childbearing age, and the ages at marriage and first birth werestill decreasing). The diffusion process (primarily from higher to lower social
strata) moved rapidly: starting in the 1960s many changes occurred in family andfertility behavior.
In 1965, shortly after the citizenry had reached the 12 million mark, Statistics
Netherlands published a new population forecast. The prediction of nearly 21
million inhabitants by the year 2000 produced shock waves nationwide. How toaccommodate the future population was debated both within and outside
Parliament. A Royal Commission on Population Issues was established toinventory all demographic and nondemographic factors relating to population
growth, as well as to recommend feasible policies. The commission reported in
1976 after an almost paradoxical life: although it had been tasked by 1971 to
explore all growth-related issues and to formulate ways to accommodate over 18
million people by 2000—the 1967 forecast had projected a smaller population in2000 than predicted in 1965—the spectacular drop in the fertility rate from 1970
onward had not yet been incorporated in the commission’s initial assignment.

108

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

Subsequent forecasts (1970, 1972, and 1975) did not anticipate such large
population increases by 2000 but pointed to an “ageing society.” Thecommission’s final report thus presented an overall picture of how to integrate anageing population (Royal Commission on Population Issues 1976).
The commission also provided advice on several other points. Early on (1971)
it gave the green light to the establishment of a national demographic research
institute—NIDI—to broaden the government’s capacity to conduct research on
population issues. For example, at Statistics Netherlands the research units for
population forecasting methodology and for family and fertility research wereexpanded.
The Royal Commission emphasized that the government should attempt to end
natural population growth as soon as possible and strive for a stationary
population. In a subsequent parliamentary debate (1983), the preferable
stationary size was determined to be somewhat smaller—but certainly notlarger—than the population at that time (13 to 14 million). Since fertility was
below replacement, it was decided that for the time being no further government
intervention was required. Nonintervention in population issues continued to bedeemed essential.
Importantly, these actions stimulated information dissemination and research.
In 1983 the government expressed the desirability of conducting research on
measures, acceptable to the citizenry, that would contribute to preferable
population trends (Moors 1995). In so doing, it paved the way for NIDI to start
periodic research on public attitudes toward population-related policies. This
coincided nicely with the fact that new policies encouraging the economic
independence of (young) women were obstructed by social arrangements thatmade workplace and family responsibilities incompatible. The government also
determined that it needed to be periodically informed about the prevailing
population issues. To this end it formed the Working Party on the Periodic
Reporting on Population Issues, consisting of the representatives of various
ministries, official planning agencies, and Statistics Netherlands. It is chaired andadministered by NIDI. The Working Party reported its findings in 1984, 1987,
1991, 1994, and 1997, and a 2000 report is scheduled.
4.2. Family Policy

The core of Dutch family policy is labor and space related. The current welfare
state aims to make employment available to anyone who wants or needs it, toreduce unemployment and poverty, to financially support people who areunable to work, and to care for retirees. In addition, the government attempts todeliver educational services, to provide easy access to low-cost medical services,Population Issues in the Netherlands

109

to facilitate a long and healthy life, to combat crime, to protect the environment,
and to carefully plan the use of space by a large population in a relatively small
country. As the Netherlands is a member of the European Union, Dutch
socioeconomic policy increasingly takes it cue from the EU.
A structural weakness of the Dutch political system is the problem in formulatingclear-cut policies based on the differentiated landscape of political parties and thefinancial means to implement new legislation (Kuijsten and Schulze 1997).
Transferring public money from one sector to another is relatively difficult since somany financial streams are earmarked by government regulations.
The Dutch welfare state was established rather late. Although the family has
been the cornerstone of society, it initially was based on the traditional oneincome family—the father working full-time outside the home, the mother taking
care of the household and children. For many years it was relatively easy tosupport a large family on one income, thanks in part to the system of childallowances, which makes available the same amount of money for eachdependent child. Today, however, this sum covers only a minor portion of thedirect cost of raising children.
Until recently it was difficult to find the word “family” in the official policy
documentation, but now almost all political parties claim that the family is very
important, although to be found indirectly under headings such as “emancipation”
or “making child care and labor careers more compatible.” This means that family
policy is not an explicit, harmonized, coordinated, or consistent priority.
A prominent feature of the present workforce is the large proportion of
women who are employed part-time (the “Dutch solution”). Given the labormarket’s need for countless women who did not work outside the home, many
more part-time jobs with flexible hours were created to attract those“housewives” who could not or would not accept full-time jobs.
Like many other countries, the Netherlands has established regulations to ensurechild allowances as well as maternity and parental leave. Maternity leave schemes
have recently been changed to correspond with the more standard European plans(16 weeks, with full salary). Parental leave, however, falls short, since it is mainly
unpaid: with no income substitute and no requirement that employers continue toemploy the individual at least part-time when the maternity leave ends, parental
leave is almost purely symbolic (Kuijsten and Schulze 1997).
Families receive financial assistance if they lose the primary income earner—
e.g., after widowhood or divorce. An allowance for widows and orphans has
existed since the beginning of the twentieth century. Support is also available forpeople who lose their jobs (unemployment benefit) or become ill (sickness
benefit). Having a job is based on a system of minimum wages. Retirement iscompulsory at age 65.

110

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

Since the 1960s the Netherlands has introduced more liberal legislation to deal
with emerging issues like birth control (1969), divorce (1971), and abortion (1981).
All of these measures reflect women’s demands for greater equality andindependence. Yet today most household chores are still performed by women(they do about 70% of all unpaid tasks, while men do about 70% of all paid tasks).
Financial support has also been introduced to help low-income people pay
their rent. Especially one-parent families, consisting mainly of women and theirchildren, make use of this assistance. Moreover, for a low cost partners plus
children can be added to the health insurance of employees with an income
under a specified level (compulsory health insurance system).
Child care has long been perceived as the family’s responsibility. The result isan acute shortage of facilities that care for children. Although they are increasing
after the recent doubling of financial support, the number of child-care facilities
can serve only about 10% of all Dutch children on a full-time basis. As aconsequence, mothers feel they must be at home after school hours. This is why
many of them opt for part-time jobs. Presently under discussion is a law
regarding “the right to have part-time work” that would also permit the normal
access to all benefits of the social security system.
The high fertility rates until the end of the 1960s ensured replacement of the
population. But the modern family’s problems with combining family and work
responsibilities do not only focus on caring for children. Many adults in the labormarket also have to deal with the increasing frailty of their parents. Ageing andfamily policy go hand in hand: broadening the country’s family care policy
would give employees more opportunities to care for children or parents.
Gauthier (1996) shows that the Netherlands is not the most generous country
when it comes to enabling citizens to shape their life as they wish. A lot ofcreativity, personal resources, and/or financial investments are still needed. To acertain extent the labor market also reacts and adapts to what people want: if
women are available only part-time or want flexible shifts, then an increasing
supply of part-time and flex jobs will result.
4.3. Policy Effects on Fertility

Dutch policies have never aimed for a specific fertility rate, but rather havesought to make family and workplace commitments more compatible. Moreover,such policies stress economic independence. According to fertility surveys, mostcouples want children, yet many end up with a somewhat smaller number thaninitially desired. Research has focused on what makes people decide to havefewer offspring. The government is interested in how it may influence thecitizenry not to have substantially smaller families.

Population Issues in the Netherlands

111

Yet the “loss of fertility” can be attributed to factors that may be difficult toovercome. These range from delaying childbirth so long that sub- or infertility
problems prevent the start or continuation of a pregnancy, to separation or
divorce before the final family size is reached, to a couple’s reconsideration of
their earlier views. Only in a few cases does a family end up larger than
anticipated—e.g., because of a multiple birth.
What fertility rate could be expected if the labor market and the family weremore compatible—if, e.g., men increased their share of household tasks? Weknow that men would be willing to do so if they worked in their paid jobs fewer
hours per week. However, men are less likely than women to settle for part-timework since men are generally older and (slightly) better educated than theirpartners and thus generate a higher income. It is doubtful that the elevated rates
of divorce and single parenthood will disappear. Modern life is much more
flexible than before; people are making their way after confronting a variety ofchallenges. The citizenry is better educated, and society is much moreindividualized. Large families are no longer popular or practical. Therefore, it isunlikely that the fertility rate will rise to any great extent. In that sense themedium fertility assumption is realistic.
The high population density, the fact that the population is still increasing, therising concern about ecology (which is related to population pressures), and thehigh degree of personal integrity and private responsibility within the citizenry all
suggest that the government will not change the policies already in place. Moors(1995) shows that most citizens prefer a stationary or smaller population.
Continued ageing is evaluated rather negatively, but the declining number ofchildren per woman receives large support, since that relates to “wanting to live
more comfortably,” “increased female labor force participation,” and “thegrowing desire among men and women for independence and personaladvancement.” Such attitudes demonstrate the realization that parenthoodincreasingly goes hand in hand with other obviously competitive goals. Social
policy regarding fertility behavior has a chance only if it is not limited to family
concerns. But even then people are more interested in a happy life, and in theirhappiness with children, than in a large family: i.e., they prefer to invest in thequality—rather than the quantity—of children.
Moors (1995) further found that couples with children strongly approve of
measures providing financial support if such measures allow them to increase thecompatibility of all their life goals. As they have already adapted their daily lives
to the cost as well as to the time and facilities available, it is doubtful that theywould use additional money to increase the size of their family, since they
probably prefer to use those funds for the children they already have. People whoare still childless, particularly those in the younger age groups and living with a112

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

partner, regard leave and work arrangements and child-care facilities as more
important. Obviously these individuals anticipate the material problems to come;they are trying to decide how to reorient their lives once their children arrive, and,since both partners usually have a job, they are not yet concerned about costs.
In considering the question of the future fertility rate under ideal
circumstances, then, there is no indication that specific government measureswould significantly increase the birthrate. The decision to become a parent is a
crucial threshold in people’s lives that is seldom susceptible to change. Only aminor proportion of parents would consider having an additional child given theexistence of policies they view as important (better leave and work
arrangements, adequate child-care facilities, financial incentives). Such policies,
however, could be expected to influence the timing of births. People might havetheir children earlier if combining work and family responsibilities became easier.
A kind of baby boom could be expected if new legislation eliminated one or two
years of debate about how to integrate household and workforce tasks. Whether
the mean age at first birth would drop as well would depend on the numericaleffects of the still rising proportion of higher-educated people.
Surveys indicate that people increasingly prefer the supplementary household
model (the woman takes care of the children and supplements the family income
via part-time work) and the egalitarian household model (both partners sharepaid and unpaid tasks almost equally) to the traditional (bourgeois) model (theman works full-time and the woman takes care of the children and home). The
popularity of the no-child household model has increased only slightly (Beets,
Liefbroer, and Gierveld 1997). Research also indicates that the labor market can
influence female employment rates: the prospect of flexible working hours
induces more women to remain in their jobs in order to live in a
“supplementary” or more “egalitarian” household. The quality of child-carefacilities is less influential. But attitudes have to change. New policies should
foster more equitable views on gender roles both in private life and in society
generally, especially regarding labor market participation.
With respect to late fertility the government is now considering the use of
information, education, and communication on the social and medical
implications of late parenthood to promote informed decision-making on the partof potential parents. Since fecundity declines with the increasing age of women,
the growing demand for assisted reproduction has been striking. There isincreasing evidence that late parenthood and birth intervals shorter than one year
negatively influence the fecundity prospects of daughters. Many couples who
end up childless regret that they postponed having children so long.
These measures would not have a pronatalist orientation. Rather, they would
enable parents to integrate parental responsibilities with paid employment that

Population Issues in the Netherlands

113

encourages equal opportunities. Although government policies focus largely on
the welfare of the family, not on the strict fertility question, they could produce aslight rise in fertility rates, mainly because people would be motivated to havetheir babies earlier or would feel themselves supported to realize the family size
they always had in mind. A fundamental change in the ultimate number ofchildren per birth cohort is unlikely.
4.4. Migration

The extent and patterns of international migration are difficult to foresee, butcurrent projections continue to assume a positive net migration balance. In
addition to migration owing to family reunion and family formation, the currently
unstable economic and political situation in large parts of the world gives rise to
substantive flows of refugees and asylum seekers, who are counted as migrants
only after admission procedures have been completed or after a stay in the
Netherlands of at least one year.
Despite ever more restrictive admission policies, which in particular aim to
reduce economically motivated migration from outside the European Union, it isrecognized that international migration will continue to be a substantive factor in
population dynamics in the Netherlands, as it is in many other member states of
the European Union. Restrictive admission practices will be continued, also witha view to strengthening support for humane treatment of refugees and asylum
seekers. Admission policies emphasize responsible and rapid procedures forevaluating applications for temporary and permanent residence, as well as forhumane and effective repatriation.
4.5. Ageing

Population ageing comes at a cost: although the elderly are increasingly better
educated, occupied better positions in the labor market, are “richer” thanprevious generations (higher pensions), and have fewer children to share theircapital with, their increasing numbers will raise the cost not only of social
security (pensions) but also of health and welfare services. Ageing per se,
however, is not the largest contributor to rising health care costs. More significant
are the expected increases in the cost of medical-technological developments
and of ageing medical personnel. Recently the government created a special fundsubsidized by the profits of the current economic prosperity to secure public
pension schemes (AOW) for future generations. In this sense the Dutch
government is already “saving for the future.”
Although the main thrust of population ageing is yet to come, its impact is114

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

already felt in the labor market, as government policies stimulate the hiring ofelderly workers. Careful management of human resources is a goal in itself; thisis only reinforced by the need to increase labor force participation in order toabsorb the spiraling costs of an ageing population. Integrated social and labormarket policies should try to reconcile the diverging needs of macroeconomic
policy (higher activity rates), cost-benefit analyses of employers who aim to
reduce the higher costs (seniority) of an ageing workforce, and the individual
desire and need for early retirement. Careful management of human resources
also calls for increased schooling and training efforts in a setting of lifelong
learning, which should benefit individual employees, labor organizations, andsociety at large.
Softening the ageing curve via age-specific immigration is not an option for the
Netherlands, as it would only add to the population density. Moreover, migrants
also will age.

5. Conclusion
Population dynamics are intricately related to long-lasting processes of social,economic, and cultural change. The Netherlands strives to optimize the wellbeing of its people in terms of health, income, and labor participation. The Dutch
population is among the youngest in an ageing Europe and will continue togrow for the time being. Population density is high. Many citizens would prefer aless populated country. Fertility is more or less stable at below-replacementlevels without indications for major change. Women have their children at
relatively advanced ages (late motherhood). The decline of the youngest
population has more or less run its course, while the main thrust of population
ageing is yet to come.
Lifelong education is promoted, as is female participation in the workforce tomake all individuals as economically independent as possible. The number ofchild-care facilities has been increased and for mothers many flexible, part-timejobs have been created, popularizing the one-and-a-half-income family (father
working full-time, mother working part-time). It is becoming more and moredifficult to raise children with only one full-time income. Through increased
harmonization and coordination of consistent “emancipation” policies, men will
be motivated to assume responsibility for some household tasks. A Royal
Commission on Future Scenarios for the Redistribution of Unpaid Work reported
in 1995 that an ideal solution would be the one-and-a-half-income family inwhich each of the partners raised three-quarters of the family income.
Next to labor and health, space is a critical issue. The scarcity of space in thePopulation Issues in the Netherlands

115

Netherlands produces ecological constraints. Therefore, some doubt the wisdomof humane immigration (asylum seeking) because “The Netherlands is full.” This
more or less continuous dispute centers around the fact that the country isalready overpopulated and should decrease the size of its population as soon as
possible. But more often the controversy involves real spatial issues such aswhere to build a new international airport, new highways, or new, high-speed
railroads, or the concern that the sea level may be rising. The demographic
outlook thus calls for careful management of valuable resources. In the short run,spatial and housing needs require additional investments in housing, facilities,
and infrastructure. In view of the uneven spatial distribution of the population,
policies should also address the issue of how to cope with the demands of bothstronger and weaker economic growth regions. In the longer run, the overall
perspective of spatial policy will have to change from population growth topopulation decline. No specific demographic targets have been set, or changed, inview of the emerging population decline, although a stationary population isviewed as most desirable. Policies will remain accommodative rather than directive.
Concerns about late parenthood are increasing—not in the sense that lateparents would not be as good as earlier parents, but because late fertility seems
to be a factor (although not the most important one) in the development ofbreast cancer,4 and because fecundity declines with age; not all people are able
to have the “happy family” that they planned. Many seem to think thatconception can occur as soon as they stop using birth control methods. Yet theage-specific curve on the probability of conception is fairly unknown. In
particular, those who remain childless complain that society made them postpone
having a child. With better information, they say, they would have tried to have ababy earlier in life. The government is now considering proposals to educate thepublic not only on how to prevent pregnancy but also on the chances ofconception at specific ages. Again, this information focuses mainly on people’s
well-being (helping to make a wish come true).
In the Netherlands ageing is viewed primarily as an irreversible, “natural”
process. It is the successful outcome of combating early mortality and improving
health over the last centuries plus the perception that family size is more the resultof opportunities to invest in the “quality” rather than the “quantity” of children.
Ageing is part of a changing world in which survival per se and economic security
are making a place for self-expression and autonomy. Costly health research andtechnological developments have helped societies to lower mortality rates.
In the Netherlands ageing is generally perceived as a challenge; few regard it
as a problem. Ageing is seen as “demographic maturity.” Moreover, the postwar
4

The Netherlands is among the countries with a high rate of breast cancer.

116

Gijs BEETS and Nico Van NIMWEGEN

baby boom has provided a “demographic bonus.” Never before have people hadsuch a high healthy life expectancy, although unfortunately the gap between
healthy life expectancy and overall life expectancy seems to be increasingslightly in the Western world. That is part of the paradox that a successful healthcare program may lead to extensions of unhealthiness and physical limitations.
However, that is a challenge for the future as well: try to combat untimely healthconstraints and mortality.
The country still favors a more or less stationary population. This means thatsmooth fertility curves are preferable to booms and busts. Booms may create
new problems reaching farther into the future that may have lifelong financial
effects. The Dutch solution reflects a reluctance to interfere in demographic
issues: it is laissez-faire again. When the baby boomers disappear (about 2040),
the perspective on stationarity (demographic stationarity but also financial
stationarity) will be more enlightened.

References
Beets, G. 1997. “Delayed Parenthood: A Literature Search.” NIDI Working paper, 1997–98, 59
pp. (in Dutch)
Beets, G. C. N., A. C. Liefbroer, and J. de Jong Gierveld. 1997. “Combining Employment andParenthood: A Longitudinal Study of Intentions of Dutch Young Adults.” Population
Research and Policy Review 16: 457–74.
De Beer, J., and H. van de Giessen. 1989. “From Birth Expectations to Birth Forecasts.” Monthly
Bulletin of Population Statistics (Statistics Netherlands) 37(7): 19–30. (mainly in Dutch)
De Jong, A. H. 1997. “Determinants of Fertility Trends.” Monthly Bulletin of Population Statistics(Statistics Netherlands) 45(10): 12–24. (mainly in Dutch)
Gauthier, A. H. 1996. The State and the Family: A Comparative Analysis of Family Policies inIndustrialized Countries. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jones, E. F., et al. 1986. Teenage Pregnancies in Industrialized Countries. New Haven andLondon: Yale University Press.
Kuijsten, A., and H. Schulze. 1997. “The Netherlands: The Latent Family.” In Family Life andFamily Policies in Europe, vol. 1, Structures and Trends in the 1980s, edited by F. Kaufmann,
A. Kuijsten, H. Schulze, and K. Strohmeier, 254–301. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Monnier, A. 1987. “Projets de fécondité et fécondité effective, une enquête longitudinale, 1974,
1976, 1979.” Population (INED) 42(6): 819–42.
Moors, H. 1995. “The Netherlands: Great Tolerance but Little Solidarity.” In Population, Family,
and Welfare, vol. 1, A Comparative Survey of European Attitudes, edited by H. Moors and R.
Palomba, 175–96. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
National Report of the Netherlands. 1998. Report, initially drafted by Nico van Nimwegen (NIDI),
written for the Regional Population Meeting (ECE, UN), Budapest, December 7–9, 1998.
Royal Commission on Future Scenarios for the Redistribution of Unpaid Work. 1995. Unpaid
Care Distributed More Equally. The Hague: Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. (inDutch)

Population Issues in the Netherlands

117Royal Commission on Population Issues. 1976. Population and Well-Being: Final Report. The
Hague: Staatsuitgeverij. (in Dutch)
Statistics Netherlands. 1994. Family Union and Childbearing in the 1990s. Voorburg/Helen:
Statistics Netherlands. (in Dutch)
United Nations Population Fund. 1998. The State of World Population: The New Generations.
New York: UNFPA.
Van de Kaa, D. J. 1987. “Europe’s Second Demographic Transition.” Population Bulletin42(1): 1–57.
Van de Kaa, D. J. 1994. “The Second Demographic Transition Revisited: Theories andExplanations.” In Population and Family in the Low Countries, 1993: Late Fertility andOther Current Issues, edited by G. C. N. Beets et al., 81–126. Lisse/Amsterdam: Swets &Zeitlinger.
Van Poppel, F., and P. Ekamper. 1999. “A Reconstruction of the Development of Mortality andFertility Patterns in the Netherlands, 1850–1996.” Internal document. NIDI (in progress).
Working Party on the Periodical Reporting on Population Issues. 1997. Population Issues in the
Netherlands, 1997. Edited by N. van Nimwegen and G. Beets. NIDI Report no. 50. The
Hague: NIDI.